Prager's hit piece

Published: 01/19/2012 at 7:36 PM

It’s odd that Dennis Prager (who loves to cite history) felt the need to leave out all the historical evidence in a lame attempt to cast Paul as anti-American and loved by the “left.” What is just as disturbing as the “truthers” is the fact that Prager seems to insinuate that the hundreds of thousands of women and children that died because of our sanctions was something that “Paul and the left claim.” It isn’t a claim; it’s a fact and was even deemed “worth it” by Madeline Albright during an interview that was televised to the world.

How did those sanctions make us any safer anyway? What was so “good” about those sanctions? We ended up invading/occupying them, destroying their country, displaced millions including a large majority of Christians, and that doesn’t even include all those killed, widowed and orphaned. I wonder how all those that survived are going to look at us … as a righteous nation? Please.

Prager also felt the need to leave out that the documented motivations behind 9/11 were the sanctions and bombing campaign in Iraq, bases in Saudi Arabia, constant meddling in Muslim countries, blind support for Israel regarding the West Bank, among other reasons that were the direct result of our foreign policy. All this is backed up by the Defense Department and has even been admitted by the lead proponents of the war (Wolfowitz, among others). Is this intentional because it shows how weak his argument stands up to reality – or did he just miss the memo?

If you believe that Islam is the greatest threat to the U.S. (I do not) then that is fine with me, and I’d be willing to engage anyone on that subject. But the dishonesty about the motivations behind 9/11 and the disastrous policy we have pursued based on those falsehoods no longer have any credibility – we have a decade of evidence to the contrary. Prager’s arguments against Paul are nothing more than accusations of anti-Americanism while failing to cite all the evidence that supports Paul’s positions even by the people Prager worships at the Pentagon. Perhaps Prager is right about the stat on blacks and the death penalty; but it’s irrelevant anyway because the purpose of his column is about associating (falsely) Paul with anti-Americanism and leftism.

It’s a bit ironic that Prager is a devout supporter of the two biggest social-engineering projects in recent American history: the drug war and democratizing the Middle East – you can’t be more to the left than that.